Send Letters to editor@ncc-1776.orgNote: All letters to this address will be considered for
publication unless they say explicitly Not For Publication

[Letters to the editor are welcome on any and all subjects. Sign your
letter in the text body with your name and e-mail address as you wish
them to appear, otherwise we will use the information in the "From:"
header!]

The argument that intellectual property is a creation of government
and that, since it cannot exist in the absence of government it is
therefore theft is one of those arguments that is facially plausible,
but deeply flawed. There IS in fact a non-governmental means for
protecting and enforcing intellectual property rights and we've all
been dealing with it for years now. I refer of course, to the End User
Licensing Agreement (EULA), which we all routinely ignore every time
we install a program.

When you go out to Walmart and buy a copy of a computer program or
game, you are actually only purchasing the right to USE the program or
game on ONE machine. The program itself, along with the CD and any
supporting documentation remain the property of the company that
you're "buying" it from. Don't believe me? Go look. I'll wait. See?

The same thing can be done with books, of course. Or a novel design
for a rifle. Or anything else. And for those who will immediately
scream that it's not fair well, you're under no obligation to enter
into the contract. You're more than free to do without it. Because
now, it's no longer a matter of government enforcing a "right", it's a
matter of honoring the contract YOU entered into voluntarily. And
enforcement of contracts is something that there always has to be a
provision for, albeit not necessarily a government one. My EULA would
probably state that any dispute would be settled by appeal to my wife.
Don't like it? Don't buy it.

"Had anybody ever before developed an idea of what might happen in the
closed ecology of a spaceship when an apparently harmless and
goll-durn cute ingratiating extraterrestrial species got taken aboard
as pets and then proved to be not only omnivorous and parthenogenetic
but also fecund to a degree that might beggar the imagination? Only
Heinlein."

Not only Heinlein, but most every 18th century sea-faring writer who
dealt with rats.

Or any Australian who used to think rabbits were cute and harmless.

How about Moties, those little watchmakers who, unless one voids one's
ship to vacuum once in a while, will take the ship apart?

L. Neil does a very good job of avoiding the problem with his
membranes which prevent what is on one side getting on the other
without permission. I find myself hoping they get invented sooner
rather than later on a near daily basis.

Curt Howland
Howland@priss.com

Like this? Why not pay the author!Select amount then click "Donate Now"

In all the fooforaw over Arizona's SB 1070 attention has been diverted
from two topics. The first is that Congress is dragging its feet on
reforming immigration policy, which is what led to SB 1070 in the
first place. Now if you respond to this that the only real reform is
total repeal of all existing immigration quota and work permit
requirements I won't argue. I will even argue that the only purpose of
the existing law is to create an underclass of exploited and underpaid
workers whose ability to stick up for their rights is limited because
they lack official permission to be in the US. While Conservatives try
to prove how tough they are and determined to protect American life,
property and national security Liberals attempt to demonstrate their
compassion (especially at someone else's expense). Both are doing an
excellent job of failing to secure anybody's rights, property or
security. Instead they are encouraging anger, fear, bigotry and hatred
and engaging in cheap demagoguery at the expense of America's
citizenry and those aliens residing in the US whether or not their
papers are in order.

These people (and I use the term as Robert E. Lee used it to describe
Yankees during the War of Northern Aggression ) need to have their
feet held to the fire to resolve this unconstitutional and unjust
situation.

The second thing that sneaked in under the radar is that Arizona has
gone over to Constitutional (aka Vermont) carry. That is, assuming
you are not legally disallowed (to include carry in certain restricted
areas) from carrying weapons or otherwise engaged in criminal activity
at the time, you may legally carry any firearm openly or concealed on
your person. While there remains a sufficiency of ifs, ors, and buts
to delight the soul of a shyster looking for work it's till a huge
improvement on the laws in 47 other states, DC and the US's
territories and possessions.

Undoubtedly the attention to SB 1070 will divert people's attention
from Arizona's new gun law as long as that state's violent crime rate
stays steady or continues to decline. But rest assured that if someone
so much as pulls out a pistol to shoot a rabid dog that was about to
bite a kid some liberal hoplophobe will deliberately misunderstand and
misstate the situation as a pretext to denounce the citizens of
Arizona and all supporters of the right to keep and bear arms as a
pack of irresponsible bloodthirsty yahoos (pronounced yay-hooz to get
the full affect of their comments).

Jesus (pronounced Jee-zuz, Heh-sus or even Hay-soos, I'm not picky)
give me patience with these idiots (or idjits if you prefer).
Meanwhile the attention of the American public has quite skillfully
been manipulated by our misleaders and their whores (referring to
mercenary and not sexual proclivities) in the press.

All the recent debate and discussion over "intellectual property" made
me decide to put my money (or lack thereof) where my beliefs lie. All
my books, such as they are, are now available for free download. Check
them out and find the links at

Sure, it would be nice to make money from the effort of writing, but I
can't reconcile seeking the state's protection with my rejection of
the legitimacy of the state and all its coercive actions; even when
they might benefit me personally. However, as always, I still try to
respect the wishes of all creators of imaginative content, while not
demanding they do the same for me.

Read any high school US History text. The Progressive movement of the
Mauve Era is depicted as a non radical, pragmatic alternative
/successor to the Populist movement. I will neither defend or
criticize the Mauve Era Progressives. I merely note that they get all
sorts of good press.

By the beginning of the Twentyfirst Century American liberals had
succeeded in giving themselves a bad name. At that time they renamed
themselves Progressives. As far as I can tell they are flogging the
same agenda, or an even more radical agenda, than the one that peaked
out in 1994. The American left's leadership will continue to call
itself Progressive instead of socialist or liberal trying to ride on
Teddy Roosevelt's coat tails. Interestingly everyone else calls them
liberals, even many people who support their agenda.

Apparently the left's leaders have lost the ability to recognize when
they aren't fooling anyone.